10th Edition Gameplay and Rules news and discussion - Terrain pg 46

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Wayniac**

(Also said this in the N&R thread). My worry is this is going to go back to the 3rd edition days where your chapter/legion/etc. didn't matter at all, beyond colors. You had no tactical differences and played exactly the same.

**catbarf**

Wayniac wrote:
(Also said this in the N&R thread). My worry is this is going to go back to the 3rd edition days where your chapter/legion/etc. didn't matter at all, beyond colors. You had no tactical differences and played exactly the same.

This is more like 4th Ed, where you could pick what traits you wanted for your army and they weren't locked to your color scheme.

That was a high water mark for army personalization and theming.

**VladimirHerzog**

Wayniac wrote:
(Also said this in the N&R thread). My worry is this is going to go back to the 3rd edition days where your chapter/legion/etc. didn't matter at all, beyond colors. You had no tactical differences and played exactly the same.

You'll still be able to make fluffy subfaction-specific lists... Just because Ultramarines can now also do a biker-centric list doesnt mean white scars arent relevant anymore

**vipoid**

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Siegfriedfr wrote:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/03/30/how-army-building-works-in-the-new-edition-of-warhammer-40000/

For the new edition, the rules team have tried to incentivise the use of a wider range of units by ensuring that each one has a cool, unique ability to bring to the field. Troops are no longer a tax you must pay to unlock the units you actually want to take – but you’ll absolutely still be seeing plenty of classic front line squads showing up on the field.

Battle Size

There are now three main army sizes: Incursion (1,000 points), Strike Force (2,000 points), and Onslaught (3,000 points). 500-point games are still perfectly possible, of course, but the Warhammer 40,000 Core Rules are optimised for slightly larger forces than that.*

Power Levels are a thing of the past – points are now the order of the day.

Select Detachment Rules

Here’s where the differences begin to show themselves. Instead of choosing a subfaction or constructing your own, you now choose a single set of Detachment rules for your whole army. These include special abilities, Enhancements, Stratagems, and unit restrictions.

For instance, you might be playing as the Gladius Task Force of the Adeptus Astartes. Your faction gives you the Oath of Moment army rule (more on this next week!) while your Detachment gives you access to six unique Stratagems – on top of the core group in the main rules – as well as four exclusive Enhancements for your Space Marine characters. It also bags you the Combat Doctrines ability, which allows you to pick from three powerful doctrines during your Command phase.

If you chose to fight with a different Detachment, you’d replace the Strategems, Enhancements and Combat Doctrines with those of the new Detachment.

Detachment choice will very rarely be tied to an army colour scheme. So while Ultramarines might be the theoretical and practical masters of the Gladius Task Force, other Chapters can use it too – and the same will be true of many other detachments as they are added into the game. This also means that you can try multiple Detachments with a single army. You are not going to be locked into a single Detachment just because you painted your army blue, or red, or yellow.

This is an incredibly flexible system that will allow for many weird and wonderful armies in future codexes…

Pick units

Using the Faction keyword you picked earlier, you now select the units you want to include in your army, with the following stipulations:

- You must include at least one CHARACTER
- You can only include one of each named EPIC HERO
- You can only include up to three units of each datasheet
- However, you can include up to six units of each datasheet with the BATTLELINE or DEDICATED TRANSPORT keywords
- Each CHARACTER can only have one Enhancement, you can’t include more than three Enhancements in total, and these must all be different

And that’s it!

Select Warlord

You now choose one CHARACTER as your leader. They gain the WARLORD keyword, and you’re ready to select your missions.

Now, no Detachment will ever need more than a couple of pages to cover all its unique rules and restrictions, meaning there will never again be any need to waste time flicking through codex pages to find the right rule.

I gotta say, this sound really exciting...

Indeed. I can almost feel myself nodding off with excitement.

**Wayniac**

Wouldn't it be hilarious if World Eaters and TSons (Death Guard are a lot harder because they were given almost all unique stuff) were thrown back into just Chaos Space Marines with a themed detachment instead of their own full codex?

**Dysartes**

Wayniac wrote:
Wouldn't it be hilarious if World Eaters and TSons (Death Guard are a lot harder because they were given almost all unique stuff) were thrown back into just Chaos Space Marines with a themed detachment instead of their own full codex?

No, it would be exactly the opposite of hilarious.

And I don't collect either of them.

**VladimirHerzog**

Wayniac wrote:
Wouldn't it be hilarious if World Eaters and TSons (Death Guard are a lot harder because they were given almost all unique stuff) were thrown back into just Chaos Space Marines with a themed detachment instead of their own full codex?

i'd welcome it, give my thousand sons some options ffs

**Siegfriedfr**

Wayniac wrote:
Wouldn't it be hilarious if World Eaters and TSons (Death Guard are a lot harder because they were given almost all unique stuff) were thrown back into just Chaos Space Marines with a themed detachment instead of their own full codex?

Codexes will obviously include faction-specific detachements which will fulfill people' lore and fluff boners. No reason for gloom and doom.

**Ravajaxe**

Wayniac wrote:
Wouldn't it be hilarious if World Eaters and TSons (Death Guard are a lot harder because they were given almost all unique stuff) were thrown back into just Chaos Space Marines with a themed detachment instead of their own full codex?

I don't think this will happen now that CSM armies have loads of specific units and characters.

However I could see all loyalist SM chapters rolled into one codex, then being granted several generic detachments available to all chapters. The Gladius Task Force being the example given in GW's article. Each detachment would have its tactical orientation, but without excluding unit types, and without being tied to one chapter. Then you would have codex supplements, that describe BA, SW, UM, DA etc... specific epic heroes, and the few specific units. Another advantage I could foresee is the greater compatibility with primaris marine's range. This range is way less chapter specific than the firstborn ranges. So by rolling all chapters in one generic codex containing all detachments organisations, there will be less constraints, less confusions for newbies and more simplicity to manage the power levels. Your tactical orientation would be untied from the colour scheme.

**Tittliewinks22**

Ravajaxe wrote:
I don't think this will happen now that CSM armies have loads of specific units and characters.

I think only Death Guard have a roster of unique units suitable to sustain a standalone army. The other 3 god's have a splashing of flavor... hell Tzeentch even has to pull from the mortal realms to bolster the numbers lol

**Daedalus81**

catbarf wrote:
When painting your force a certain color meant you were locked into your subfaction bonus being better melee, yeah no kidding you refused to take ranged specialists. Blood Angels armies didn't even take their own tank because they had zero synergy with the subfaction specialty; that isn't the fault of players, it's an artifact of poor subfaction design that overtly encourages flanderized army composition.

Having detachments tied to playstyles or themes rather than just the subfaction itself is a positive change and in line with what we've seen in recent codices, like Astra Militarum. If you want to keep playing the archetypical version of a subfaction there's nothing stopping you from taking the 'appropriate' detachment.

I think where people struggle is that BA has units that define them. Imperial Fists ( as my frequent example ) doesn't have that same benefit, but then that's why BA have their own codex.

Perhaps in the codex there will be a 'bolter drill' detachment that IF players will enjoy, but isn't locked to them. I don't think any of this is bad - it all just feels a bit different.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Unit1126PLL wrote:
Yeouch, those army build rules have broken two thirds of my armies, unless I start changing my lore. Oi vey.

What broke for you?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

ccs wrote:
BA players don't HAVE to make a CC oriented army to be effective. They CHOOSE to. And they will continue to make that same choice. It doesn't matter wether their rules are in a book or on a card.

I mean when you get bonuses when charging you're not likely to choose otherwise, right?

Stratagems are still going to spoil this a bit and I am not sure if they'll be strategic or tactical, but ones that target specific units will likely shape army building in a similar fashion.

**Type40**

Wayniac wrote:
Wouldn't it be hilarious if World Eaters and TSons (Death Guard are a lot harder because they were given almost all unique stuff) were thrown back into just Chaos Space Marines with a themed detachment instead of their own full codex?

I could 100% see this happening. SW used to have just as many, if not more, unique kits and data sheets as DG. Then GW rolled out all the generic primaris and started treating it all as "just the same army." In fact, they are still selling the blood claw/grey hunter kit, SW dreadnought, SW terminators and all that stuff. If SW are going to be "just another marine faction" then why couldnt it happen to DG. It took one edition worth of releases and rules rewrites to go from every single data sheet and kit in this codex is uniquely flavored for this army (7th) to now you share units with another army (8th) to you are a subfaction (9th) and now just, you are a marine (now) . I think it will be quite logical for that to start happening to the chaos sub-factions as well when GW starts getting board of supporting their variety of rule books. Another example is harlequins, it was a big deal when they got their own codex, GW and their hype team made it sound like their range would increase over the next several years, instead, no range increase and they are an addendum to the eldar dex. Honestly, I 100% would not be surprised by this.

I know this is sometimes a hot take on here, but, just like people enjoy playing separate chaos factions for their marines, I picked space wolves originally because they had unique kits and a unique play style/set of rules compared to every other loyalist marine faction (once upon a time, they didnt have a single data-sheet that was the same and 90% of their kits were unique) and since then they slowly told me "no, Type 40, you have to play vanilla marines, and if you don't like it you can go back to the couch you rode in on."

**Daedalus81**

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Wayniac wrote:
Wouldn't it be hilarious if World Eaters and TSons (Death Guard are a lot harder because they were given almost all unique stuff) were thrown back into just Chaos Space Marines with a themed detachment instead of their own full codex?

Codexes will obviously include faction-specific detachements which will fulfill people' lore and fluff boners. No reason for gloom and doom.

Maybe. The statement from GW could be what they plan for the future or it could just be for what is coming right now. But I get the sense that most people would prefer this more loose affiliation.

**Some_Call_Me_Tim**

Yeah it’s the same deal with deathwatch, they were sorta their own thing in 7th and 8th then gw just decided they didn’t like them anymore and threw em in with the rest of the gak, and now due to Primaris silly nonsense we’re not allowed good special issue ammo even

**Dudeface**

VladimirHerzog wrote:
Wayniac wrote:
Wouldn't it be hilarious if World Eaters and TSons (Death Guard are a lot harder because they were given almost all unique stuff) were thrown back into just Chaos Space Marines with a themed detachment instead of their own full codex?

i'd welcome it, give my thousand sons some options ffs

I mean, what options from the main book do you expect they'd pick up whilst maintaining the fluff? Or are you happy to play "chaos legionnaires with a special rule" again?

**Daedalus81**

VladimirHerzog wrote:
i'd welcome it, give my thousand sons some options ffs

Booooo! Cast your spells and like it!

But seriously what options would you take that they don't have that wouldn't absolutely break the theme of the army?

What would actually happen is the best TS units would get poached and the rest will die. Just like in 8th where everyone took Ahriman for a while.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Type40 wrote:
I could 100% see this happening.

I will bet money that it doesn't.

**vipoid**

- Each CHARACTER can only have one Enhancement, you can’t include more than three Enhancements in total, and these must all be different

By the way, are Enhancements Artefacts and Warlord Traits or is this some new thing for 10th?

**Dudeface**

vipoid wrote:

- Each CHARACTER can only have one Enhancement, you can’t include more than three Enhancements in total, and these must all be different

By the way, are Enhancements Artefacts and Warlord Traits or is this some new thing for 10th?

They are, in AoS it's the term for relics, traits and mount traits etc.

**Type40**

Daedalus81 wrote:
VladimirHerzog wrote:
i'd welcome it, give my thousand sons some options ffs

I will bet money that it doesn't.

I'd bet money that by 11th it does lol. What makes chaos so special that it wont follow the same trends as every other sub faction in the game. Watch the "primaris of chaos" start to come out,,, then you'll know you are doomed. Everyone who plays a chaos faction will need the hot new generic unit... then it will be "oh, everyone just plays the same units with different colours" . I honestly do not see the difference between a DG terminator and a 7th SW terminator, or a DG marine squad and 7th SW grey hunter squad. DG has unique wargear and kits for these units, so did space wolves. It's all just marines with different colours right. Unique units, same, unique tanks(space wolf flyers ?) same, unique specialist units, same. I don't know, the way chaos is being handled gives me strong SW and deathwatch vibes.

**Ravajaxe**

Dudeface wrote:
vipoid wrote:

- Each CHARACTER can only have one Enhancement, you can’t include more than three Enhancements in total, and these must all be different

By the way, are Enhancements Artefacts and Warlord Traits or is this some new thing for 10th?

They are, in AoS it's the term for relics, traits and mount traits etc.

This also means we would not be allowed to find a combo between a relic and a warlord trait for our HQ character. There will just be one "enhancement" available.

**Dysartes**

Type40 wrote:
(once upon a time, they didnt have a single data-sheet that was the same and 90% of their kits were unique)

Minor point of order, but they've always had some data-sheet/unit profiles in common with other SM forces - Rhino, Land Raider, Predator, etc.

Infantry was almost always distinct to some degree before Primaris showed up, but there have always been common elements in the vehicle pool.

**Type40**

Dysartes wrote:
Type40 wrote:
(once upon a time, they didnt have a single data-sheet that was the same and 90% of their kits were unique)

Minor point of order, but they've always had some data-sheet/unit profiles in common with other SM forces - Rhino, Land Raider, Predator, etc.

Infantry was almost always distinct to some degree before Primaris showed up, but there have always been common elements in the vehicle pool.

Land raider, Rhino, predator, etc are all DG units they share and SW had some unique vehicles (although they are flyers)... so again,,, same. But yes,,, the shared vehicles are the 10 % of the 90% ... but even the SW dreadnoughts were unique.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
I am salty, I apologize for that coming out lol. I miss playing a unique faction XD. And it was a slow boiling frog situation that turned the wolves into exactly the same as every other SM army. 10th seems to be just that final nail. I was holding on, but it's time to give up. "I am a marine player." There I said it,,,, I am disgusted with what I have become XD... but jokes aside. The new edition does look interesting, I just hope I don't have to retire ALL my 6000 points of FB too soon.

**EviscerationPlague**

Dudeface wrote:
vipoid wrote:

- Each CHARACTER can only have one Enhancement, you can’t include more than three Enhancements in total, and these must all be different

By the way, are Enhancements Artefacts and Warlord Traits or is this some new thing for 10th?

They are, in AoS it's the term for relics, traits and mount traits etc.

Ah yes, because both a Relic AND Warlord Trait is super breaking on one character. Not a ploy to sell named characters at all.

**alextroy**

Actually, yes they are. Are you not aware of all the warlord trait + relic builds that have taken characters from zero to hero?

**vipoid**

Ravajaxe wrote:
This also means we would not be allowed to find a combo between a relic and a warlord trait for our HQ character. There will just be one "enhancement" available.

Oh joy of joys. I look forward to an edition of utterly bland characters with all of 1 option each.

**Dudeface**

vipoid wrote:
Ravajaxe wrote:
This also means we would not be allowed to find a combo between a relic and a warlord trait for our HQ character. There will just be one "enhancement" available.

Oh joy of joys. I look forward to an edition of utterly bland characters with all of 1 option each.

You mean 1 selection each? It's entirely possible some detachments might allow 2 to stack.

**EviscerationPlague**

alextroy wrote:
Actually, yes they are. Are you not aware of all the warlord trait + relic builds that have taken characters from zero to hero?

In extreme circumstances? Yeah I don't really care. The issue has been mainline units and the strats they can get on top of army rules. Any character afterwards was just a mere bonus.

**Ravajaxe**

Dudeface wrote:
vipoid wrote:
Ravajaxe wrote:
This also means we would not be allowed to find a combo between a relic and a warlord trait for our HQ character. There will just be one "enhancement" available.

Oh joy of joys. I look forward to an edition of utterly bland characters with all of 1 option each.

You mean 1 selection each? It's entirely possible some detachments might allow 2 to stack.

Not only ONE "enhancement" per character, without stacking, but also three "enhancements" per army at the very max. We have been granted too much customization, the results have not been pleasing to GW, soon we will be punished for all these sins.

**Dudeface**

Ravajaxe wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
vipoid wrote:
Ravajaxe wrote:
This also means we would not be allowed to find a combo between a relic and a warlord trait for our HQ character. There will just be one "enhancement" available.

Oh joy of joys. I look forward to an edition of utterly bland characters with all of 1 option each.

You mean 1 selection each? It's entirely possible some detachments might allow 2 to stack.

Not only ONE "enhancement" per character, without stacking, but also three "enhancements" par army at the very max. We have been granted too much customization, the results have not been pleasing to GW, soon we will be punished for all these sins.

I honestly don't see the problem. Too many people all claim GW is incompetent and can't write rules or balance them, they stand a better chance with fewer things to juggle. lets face it how often were people taking more than 3 traits relics? If they were how often were they stacked onto the super character?

**Unit1126PLL**

VladimirHerzog wrote:
Unit1126PLL wrote:
Yeouch, those army build rules have broken two thirds of my armies, unless I start changing my lore. Oi vey.

how so?

My Superheavy Tank Regiment's only real Character models (the keyword, not the English word) are in the Regimental H&S Company. Either I am not using my Superheavy tanks in a detachment, or I am bringing a regimental commander, her command tank, her support staff... or her XO and some staff. Or just damn the fluff and bring like, 1 character with no staff or anything whatsoever because the easiest way to coordinate a Superheavy Tank Company is apparently on foot a few yards away.

My Armageddon Steel Legion has 12 chimeras at 2k, and likely won't be able to field more than six. So uh, 1k points it is then I guess.

My daemons are probably fine. For now.